Author and host of the hit OUTDOOR CHANNEL show SHOOTING GALLERY spouts off...

Friday, December 19, 2014

Another Lovely Night at the Airport!

That's how I get into the Christmas spirit! HO-HO-WHERE'S MY LUGGAGE?!?!?!

We got the list of guns for Season 5 GUN STORIES WITH JOE MANTEGNA...I'll post it when I can fish it out of my suitcase...looks like another great season, though.

I was talking to Marshal yesterday about trends for 2015, and I'm thinking it's going to be a boy howdy Year of the 9mm. My little Christmas Angels tell me the FBI transition to 9mm is an officially done deal and we should be hearing something soon. That should change the trickle of police departments shifting to 9mm from .40 into a screaming 100-year flood...by mid-year CDNN will probably be throwing in a police trade-in .40 with every purchase of a brick of .22 ammo. I see a boom in Glock 17/19s (especially since the G17 is the most debugged handgun since the J-frame) and the newer, flashier Sig Sauer 320. M&Ps...maybe...they've been getting some less than optimal press lately and the Sig is clearly positioned as an M&P killah.

I think that'll trickle down to the 9mm carbines, too. If the 9 is spiffy out of a 4-inch pistol barrel, it should be even spiffier out of a 16-inch carbine barrel. Be interesting to watch!!!

I hear the little hooves of reindeer...must be time for my shuttle ride home!

Hi Michael. What I can't help wonder is are we just seeking a change in trends. Sort of like fashion. The way I see it, we have sub-caliber carbines (last time around is was the H&K MP5), shotguns, and rifles. Maybe we are seeing the trend shift. What do you think? Nine vs 40 vs 45 is a debate that will never end. Here's a thought I've had for a while but I have never seen discussed. I don't have the FBI report and would love a post to it if you can find it. I know when the baloon goes up did a detailed discussion and might just be there. It goes something like this from my memory. Based on lots of data the 45 takes on average 2.2 shots to stop a threat. The 40 takes 2.4 shots and the nine takes 2.6 shots. Thus all three calibers take between two and three shots so they are effectively the same. The part of the argument I don't see discussed involves knowing the standard deviation for each round in the above data. A standard deviation starts to get into statistics which makes most folks uncomfortable so I will try and do my best. One standard deviation will tell you haw many shots it takes to account for 66 percent of the data for a caliber. Three standard deviations will tell how many shots it takes for 99 percent of the data. What we care about is the upper end of shots. So, if you know the standard deviation for a caliber, you can add it three times to the average value and that will tell you what it took 99 percent of the time to stop the threat. That's the value I would like to know for each caliber. Do you think you could get the data or the link Michael? I have no idea what the standard deviation will be for each caliber will be or the conclusion but I think it would be a valuable discussion.

One last point, I will channel my inner Loui Awerbuck. In order of importance: mindset, tactics, training, and weapon. The caliber of the weapon is almost irreverent assuming you are well versed in the other three. Also, none of this matters if you can't hit your target.

Where I lived, Loui would often come by to teach the more non-standard classes in the fall. Those I would always attend. Well, it's fall and he isn't here and it hurts and I miss him. He was a great instructor and I was very fortunate to have trained with him.

The only thing that has changed is the latest data is new. 9mm ammo has evolved significantly from a ballistic point of view, so the older data set, albeit large, does not necessarily reflect current performance. The analogy would be that of .45 ACP-FMC vs. .45 ACP-HP and how we made that leap. Remember that many people walked away from the .45 for a while, before accepting the "hp" ammo'. Now it's 9mm "Old" vs. 9mm "New". Some of the ballistic performance is that profound.

I'm an old-school guy, but I now freely admit that my vintage 1967 big-block Chevy is no longer a match for the new LS-Series engines that put out more horsepower AND torque than I can milk out of that old monster. And, the newer ones are cheaper to run. Kind'a the same as in performance guns. Newer is sometimes better, but it may not stay that way.

As far as M&P guns go in competition, remember that sponsors pay people to shoot their guns. That's a good reason that you see them there. If you want the truth, seek out performance history from law enforcement agencies that have used them AND endorse them.

9mm is not really the cartridge for a 16 inch carbine. I've had a fair amount of range time with a 9mm AR carbine and it was underwhelming. There's just not enough power in 9mm to gain the benefit of the longer barrel. It was fun and accurate to 50 yards, maybe 65-70 yards. After that the groups fell apart, the velocity wasn't enough to keep the round stabilized.

Any efforts to add energy to 9mm run into the small case size and pressure problems very quickly. Let 9mm be what it is, a minimal defensive handgun round. A round that has benefited from modern bullet designs and powders.

Other AR variants, such as .300 Blackout and .357 Rimless, take better advantage of the longer barrel to improve velocity and range.